What would you do?

[kmack]

Isnt it discrimination to only be allowed to respond to a thread if you are poor?

When the purpose of the thread is to look at a topic through the eyes of a third world citizen, and eveyone who posts looks at it from the view of a wealthy american then no it isnt. I tried to keep this topic on thread but again the ignorance toward the plight of much of the world pretty much killed that idea. Apparently it was too hard for you guys to pull yourselves out of your family rooms from in front of your computers (worth more than many people make in a year in Somalia ^^) and put yourselves in the place of someone a world apart. It shocked me that so few were capable of this, I assume it is just egocentricity, or the idea that Americans are better than the rest of the world, but who knows.

 

[seinfeldrules]

And how are you any different... Again, if you cannot accept opposing viewpoints then dont except very much when you start a topic.

 

[kmack]

And how are you any different... Again, if you cannot accept opposing viewpoints then dont except very much when you start a topic.

stop trolling. I want to see the different viewpoints, but THE POINT OF THIS TOPIC IS TO TAKE YOUR VIEWPOINTS SHOVE THEM UP YOUR A** AND then calmly, place yourself in the shoes of anyone mentioned in the first post. Then, and only then, once you have freed yourself from your American self, and the viewpoints you had as an American, give me your viewpoint as an affected citizen of one of the countries in question. NOT one person did that NOT ONE.

 

[seinfeldrules]

The US govt. is brought down by Anarchist West Virginian milltia fanatics in a bloody coup.

The American people live under oppression and torture for decades by this group.

The British come in at their own great expense and take out the nutcase millitia and set up a democratic election to let a proper American govt. be formed. The British are more then happy to leave once the US can stand on its own.*

I put myself in these shoes, and I still standby my point.

I want to see the different viewpoints

Ok, then why are you upset I posted one? See, I am blamed for supposedly going "OT" in a case like this, when in reality I was discussing the topic.

NOT one person did that NOT ONE.

I did, but just because I came to different conclusions doesnt mean you need to go postal. You were trying to get people to see things exactly how you did, thats not going to happen.

 

[jondy]

I see.

So you put yourself in said peoples shoes, and then promptly went crazy and starting bombing people for the hell of it

 

[Calanen]

'The insurgency is also comprised of 'sunnis' as well as baathists?' er, the baathists were sunnis. Its like saying, not only were their israelis involved, but also jews as well.

Al-Quada, Iran and Syrian Intelligence and ex-baathists of saddam are running around with suitcases of US dollars paying people to blow stuff up. With the level of unemployment in Iraq, there will be people that do it. The ruthlessness of these 'insurgents' (who are not freedom fighters? what freedom fighters blow up innocent civilians in a marketplace in the name of freedom?) knows no limits. They will even kill barbers for giving people haircuts now. The insurgents told every1 not the vote, or you die. 8 million people voted in a population of what 24 million, only some of whom are old enough to vote. This is about 50% iof the population. Putting aside the people who dont care (and lets face it, the USA gets about 30% of its population to vote) this is overwhelming evidence that it has no popular support. These people are brutal animals who will do anything they can to get things there own way. And it does not matter who they kill to do it. They don't want a democracy, but a brutal dictatorship where they are in charge of the country's wealth and oil. The stakes are high here - so the level of ruthlessness is too.

It does not surprise me that ex Baathist thugs, ex saddam military, and people who are tempted by big bankrolls and incited by Syrian Intelligence agetns and Iranian agents are chucking bombs around. Hell, good payday at the end of the day, 20 % of the world's oil if you can pull it off. What is surprising is the cheer squad for these bastards from the loony left.

To try and paint america as a dictatorial occupying power is nuts and not sustainable at any level. America and its allies want to leave, but if they do the place will descend into anarchy. Sovereignty to the Iraqis were handed back, and they had democratic elections.

America, Britain, Australia (they are the 3 who make and shape the policy on Iraq by agreement between them) do not want to stay in Iraq. We don't want any oil. We just want the people of Iraq to have the best damn country they can have, and be able to go shopping, to work, without having some clown blow carbombs up. And thats what the overwhelming majority of Iraqis want too.

I am not sure if many of you have dealt with Iraqis, but they are very moderate muslims. A bit more like the Egyptians. You can negotiate with Iraqis and reach agreements. And I am sure they dont want any of this going on.

But what will make it very hard for the US, Britain, Australia and the other allies to keep helping these people, is if 5th Columnist Armchair Euroliberals keep bashing them over the head. And if the allies pullout, the terrorist thugs win, and a new even more brutal dictatorship will tka the place of the old and the whole exercise would have been for nothing, a bit like what happened after the Paris Accords in Vietnam in 1974.

So let's have a reality check? The Federal Government of the United States of America, does not have a torture chamber for the US Olympic team. It does not drain the swamps of the Marsh Arabs and murder them. It does not use chemical weapons on people in upstate New York. George Bush's daughters do not head up the Secret Service and roam the streets summarily executing people and videoing it for all to see, including the family of the victim.

If you have a problem with the way the US and its allies have handled the overthrow of Saddam - say what it is. I have a few problems - they had the perfect plan to run a country post-war, Eik with Germany and Macarthur with Japan. Ran like clockwork. I have said this before, and people said, Germany and Japan did not have hard core people like the Baathists. Ya reckon? The SS was not hard core?

But some bad decisions were made - and this perhaps got the terrorists a start. But I accept, that it was new terrain, and some assumptions they made were not correct.

However, to try and paint that Iraq was the land of milk and honey and the US came and took it all away from the Iraqis is just nonsense. After reading some of the stuff that Uday and Qsay did, and watching some documentaries about Iraq, I can barely conceive of the terror that would be upon every citizen from the time they woke up, til when they went to sleep, and then in their nightmares as well. There might be problems after Saddam has gone. But there is hope now for the Iraqi people - there was no hope before - and there will be no hope at all - if the loony left through disinformation and misinformation convince the public in the supporting democracies to remove the troops too early.

 

[kmack]

stop trolling. I want to see the different viewpoints, but THE POINT OF THIS TOPIC IS TO TAKE YOUR VIEWPOINTS SHOVE THEM UP YOUR A** AND then calmly, place yourself in the shoes of anyone mentioned in the first post. Then, and only then, once you have freed yourself from your American self, and the viewpoints you had as an American, give me your viewpoint as an affected citizen of one of the countries in question. NOT one person did that NOT ONE.

Seinfeld, you put yourself in the shoes of someone who wrote a post in response to my original post, not what I asked at all. Read what I wrote above, post something relevant, or get out.

 

[kmack]

Kill this thread dammit, this isnt what its about, sorry i gave you rich american boys the benefit of the doubt that you could think of anyone but yourselves. Just stop posing here, its getting sad watching you troll seinfeld.

 

[Calanen]

kmack:

Kill this thread dammit, this isnt what its about, sorry i gave you rich american boys the benefit of the doubt that you could think of anyone but yourselves. Just stop posing here, its getting sad watching you troll seinfeld.

- im not rich

and:

- im not american

And I can give you 'sources' to prove that..........

And as for thinking for ourselves, seems to me, we are not 'thinking' in your view, whenever we disagree with you?

 

[kmack]

no its not about my view. Politics whether liberal or conservative should not have anything to do with this discussion. I asked people to put themselves in the shoes of someone in Somalia or Iraq (or another third world country) and see how they would react to the U.S. actions in their respective countries. Show me someone in this thread who did that.

this thread is a big fat waste of my time! Bliink, rescue me with your lock of justice!

 

[Calanen]

I asked people to put themselves in the shoes of someone in Somalia or Iraq (or another third world country) and see how they would react to the U.S. actions in their respective countries. Show me someone in this thread who did that.

I did that - scroll up. I said I would be praying for the US to come if I live under Saddam or a whole host of others. And, noticed that even Old Europe screamed for help from Uncle Sam when they were under the jackboot of the Nazis......do as we say not as we do....

 

[Calanen]

The other thing about the Blackhawk down scenario, was that the city of Mogadishu was not hostile to all Americans. Parts of it were. But plenty of Somalians were glad the US was there. Not too many people like to live under the thumb of warlords. And if Kmack does - then start packing and move.

 

[Calanen]

Politics whether liberal or conservative should not have anything to do with this discussion

Oh really? You first post showed that it was intended to elicit sympathy for the terrorists in Iraq, which is a loony left scenario - by trying to say, hey if you were in Iraq, you'd kill innocent people too right? Right? Right? Oh no1 agrees with me....lets kill the thread then.....

 

[burner69]

Al-Quada, Iran and Syrian Intelligence and ex-baathists of saddam are running around with suitcases of US dollars paying people to blow stuff up. With the level of unemployment in Iraq, there will be people that do it. The ruthlessness of these 'insurgents' (who are not freedom fighters? what freedom fighters blow up innocent civilians in a marketplace in the name of freedom?) knows no limits.

No, they aren't freedom fighters, but that in no way negates that they still believe in what they're doing. They're getting rid of an invading army, one that's bent them over in the past. And what about the ruthlessness of the west? Bombing water treatment plants? Torturing and killing innocent civilians without charge? Are we good as gold? Do we have the right to tell them they are no-brainer evil-doers?

They will even kill barbers for giving people haircuts now. The insurgents told every1 not the vote, or you die. 8 million people voted in a population of what 24 million, only some of whom are old enough to vote. This is about 50% iof the population. Putting aside the people who dont care (and lets face it, the USA gets about 30% of its population to vote) this is overwhelming evidence that it has no popular support. These people are brutal animals who will do anything they can to get things there own way. And it does not matter who they kill to do it. They don't want a democracy, but a brutal dictatorship where they are in charge of the country's wealth and oil. The stakes are high here - so the level of ruthlessness is too.

And we'll do anything to get our way too. Does it occur to you that in a country split by so many different religious beliefs that a democracy MIGHT NOT BE THE BEST ANSWER? Just because there's more of one group dosen't mean it should hold power over the country. Democracy could potentially cause just as many problems as it hopes to overcome, especially when it's thrust on a nation by an invading army that historically is their enemy.

It does not surprise me that ex Baathist thugs, ex saddam military, and people who are tempted by big bankrolls and incited by Syrian Intelligence agetns and Iranian agents are chucking bombs around. Hell, good payday at the end of the day, 20 % of the world's oil if you can pull it off. What is surprising is the cheer squad for these bastards from the loony left.

Sorry what? You think that these people are blowing themselves up because the pays good?... erm.. try applying that to reality mate. "Hey, I'l give you a tenner if you jump off a cliff". You don't think for one second that perhaps they're doing this, taking their own lives because, just maybe, they really believe we are the enemy, that they really hate us and are willing to kill themselves for that cause? Noone cheers them. No doubt you'll say I am right now for explaining what they believe, which of course means I'm a loony left pro-terrorist guy.

To try and paint america as a dictatorial occupying power is nuts and not sustainable at any level. America and its allies want to leave, but if they do the place will descend into anarchy. Sovereignty to the Iraqis were handed back, and they had democratic elections.

Then why are we setting up oil drilling equipment there? Why did we have the 'oil for food' deal going down? Do we not want the oil? Why are so many big corporations queuing to get their industry in Iraq? Kindly explain.

America, Britain, Australia (they are the 3 who make and shape the policy on Iraq by agreement between them) do not want to stay in Iraq. We don't want any oil. We just want the people of Iraq to have the best damn country they can have, and be able to go shopping, to work, without having some clown blow carbombs up. And thats what the overwhelming majority of Iraqis want too.

We've shown a lot of interest in that oil.
And if we want Iraqi's to have the best damn country, why are we forcing Iraqis farmers to buy seeds from US sources, more expensively? And why the hell did we kill 500'000 of them by blowing up their water treatment facilities.

I am not sure if many of you have dealt with Iraqis, but they are very moderate muslims. A bit more like the Egyptians. You can negotiate with Iraqis and reach agreements. And I am sure they dont want any of this going on.

Can't comment, but don't dispute what you say.

But what will make it very hard for the US, Britain, Australia and the other allies to keep helping these people, is if 5th Columnist Armchair Euroliberals keep bashing them over the head. And if the allies pullout, the terrorist thugs win, and a new even more brutal dictatorship will tka the place of the old and the whole exercise would have been for nothing, a bit like what happened after the Paris Accords in Vietnam in 1974.

What these wacky liberals are complaining about is arrest without trial, murder and torture in prisons, sanctions being placed on them that benefit us, and screw them.

So let's have a reality check? The Federal Government of the United States of America, does not have a torture chamber for the US Olympic team. It does not drain the swamps of the Marsh Arabs and murder them. It does not use chemical weapons on people in upstate New York. George Bush's daughters do not head up the Secret Service and roam the streets summarily executing people and videoing it for all to see, including the family of the victim.

Let's.
Terrorists do not kill themselves because the price is right.
The US government do use torture in prisons holding suspects (without charge).
Murders have taken place in these prisons.
We have sold said chemical weapons to Saddam, after he killed 5000 of his own people.

If you have a problem with the way the US and its allies have handled the overthrow of Saddam - say what it is. I have a few problems - they had the perfect plan to run a country post-war, Eik with Germany and Macarthur with Japan. Ran like clockwork. I have said this before, and people said, Germany and Japan did not have hard core people like the Baathists. Ya reckon? The SS was not hard core?

But some bad decisions were made - and this perhaps got the terrorists a start. But I accept, that it was new terrain, and some assumptions they made were not correct.

Yes! And we're still making bad descisons and people aren't doing anything about it. Torture in prisons? Meh, we need info.... erm.. excuse me.. .isnt that what started the beheadings?

However, to try and paint that Iraq was the land of milk and honey and the US came and took it all away from the Iraqis is just nonsense. After reading some of the stuff that Uday and Qsay did, and watching some documentaries about Iraq, I can barely conceive of the terror that would be upon every citizen from the time they woke up, til when they went to sleep, and then in their nightmares as well. There might be problems after Saddam has gone. But there is hope now for the Iraqi people - there was no hope before - and there will be no hope at all - if the loony left through disinformation and misinformation convince the public in the supporting democracies to remove the troops too early.

Iraq was a hell hole. But no thanks to us. Many people supported Saddam when he went against the UN sanctions because it was these sanctions that stopped water treatment chemicals coming in that were so badly needed after WE blew their water supplies up; killing half a million.
Also I believe you're around ten times more likely to die in Iraq now than before the war, but I'd have to double check.

I agree things may be looking up in Iraq, which is great. But to just say that these negate all the bad things going on there is foolish, because it's these things primarily that the terrorists are bothered about.

 

[burner69]

I did that - scroll up. I said I would be praying for the US to come if I live under Saddam or a whole host of others. And, noticed that even Old Europe screamed for help from Uncle Sam when they were under the jackboot of the Nazis......do as we say not as we do....

Oh no! We didn't ask for help to overthrow a man and his army who were executing millions of innocents were we?

And you told us to bog off... until pearl harbour. We owe you big time.

 

[kmack]

The other thing about the Blackhawk down scenario, was that the city of Mogadishu was not hostile to all Americans. Parts of it were. But plenty of Somalians were glad the US was there. Not too many people like to live under the thumb of warlords. And if Kmack does - then start packing and move.

yup, you are right, you are the only one who really did what i wanted. Now if we were to continue on my debate i would reply.
What if you lived under the warlord, he gave you food, power, drugs, would you fight for him?

Sorry i generalized, but you have to admit, no one but you really got this topic.

I still want it killed though :thumbs:

 

[seinfeldrules]

Kill this thread dammit, this isnt what its about, sorry i gave you rich american boys the benefit of the doubt that you could think of anyone but yourselves. Just stop posing here, its getting sad watching you troll seinfeld.

1. I'm not rich. I bought my computer with my own money through lots of work. Get off that little tirade you are on about how my mommy bought all my stuff.
2. People were refining your original post, which is entirely on topic. The sad thing is: you are trolling worse than I am in your own thread.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

They're getting rid of an invading army, one that's bent them over in the past.

Though, before hand it was about taking down 3,000 undefensible civilian lives, and thats not getting rid of an invading army. Thats calling one on.

And what about the ruthlessness of the west? Bombing water treatment plants?

Oh please, are we really that much more ruthless as compared to those we've fought against? Bombing water treatement plants might be horrible, but so is blowing up 300+ people at an Israeli Bus stop.

Something's "got to give" for all of this rampant violence and hate. I dont believe one viewpoint, one religion, one people, or one nation is soley or even mostly responsible for how apprenhensive we've become to one another.

We choose our apprehensions -- I think we all need to chill down, and think logicaly before we tear each other down due to spur of the moment angst.

Do we have the right to tell them they are no-brainer evil-doers?

None here have referenced that the Middle-East are brainless evil doers -- huge misconception on your part.

However, we were calling Osama Bin Ladens little military religion thoughtless and evil -- just like we could call the United States politics thoughtless and evil.

However, those two are both my personal opinions -- but perhaps you caught the just of the point.

Does it occur to you that in a country split by so many different religious beliefs that a democracy MIGHT NOT BE THE BEST ANSWER?

No, its the perfect answer. With so many religious beliefs, you can uphold each ones equality by catering respectible laws defending they're moral practises, therefore breaking society in with National tolerance.

Without a Democracy to cater, one religion could be excluded or voiceless in any other situation -- a Democracy, hopefully, should failsafe that.

Just because there's more of one group dosen't mean it should hold power over the country.

However, the Country should not be stopped to its last breath due to a minority -- if a majority has ruled, so be it. If a minority disagree's, they have a right to disagree and petition to allow there changes for themselves, and the rest of the changes for other people.

But that would'nt work out, would it? Thats the dream of Neo-America. Everyone for themselves. I'm not Kosher with Anarchism.

especially when it's thrust on a nation by an invading army that historically is their enemy.

No, not historically. Only until recently can you accord from the last 20 years we might have been "a" enemy of Iraq -- but 2,000 years ago, we did'nt have a thing to do with them. 200 years ago, nadda.

If your speaking about the west, just remember that our west, the "American" west, did'nt get involved in this bullcrap until after the middle-quarter of the Cold War.

You don't think for one second that perhaps they're doing this, taking their own lives because, just maybe, they really believe we are the enemy, that they really hate us and are willing to kill themselves for that cause?

Understanding your perspectives, I disagree that they should share their opinions in the form of a bomb. I mean, what does that convey besides you were a crazy lunatic?

For all we know, the bomber could've been upset because his girlfriend broke up with him, and so therefore justified killing 60 people on that basis -- are we now to unite the girl with his charred silently screaming ashed body because it was his ideal?

I find that particularly sick, so again, I think there are other ways.

which of course means I'm a loony left pro-terrorist guy.

Well, count me as one of the conservatives who doubts that.

Then why are we setting up oil drilling equipment there?

If this indeed true, which I'm sure the source will be flung up soon after this post, then we should remember our discussion nearly three months back.

I recall we discussed, that since the US was the conquering army, it should be able to plunder out Iraq's resources simply because it won ... however, I remember during the discussion, that the US simply was'nt doing that as much as everyone should like to think.

I disagree its resources should be plundered -- ...

And why the hell did we kill 500'000 of them by blowing up their water treatment facilities.

I dont know where your getting those figures, but I do know that Saddam's choices were rigid and foreshadowed such losses, with or without our alleged involvement.

What these wacky liberals are complaining about is arrest without trial, murder and torture in prisons, sanctions being placed on them that benefit us, and screw them.

Out of 15 alleged deaths recorded by courts involving US prisons, most of the deaths came out of starving or severe beatings.

None of these were recorded beheadings, with our soldiers chanting in the background; "God is good". None of these were recorded executions, where our soldiers rolled dead bodies off of hills, and then shot them up as they rolled down.

Some have died, hundreds have been allegedly tortured (I cant find whats a distinguishing trait for torture, the littlest prisoner, or having sheet bamboo shoved under your nails), however none of those compare to the intentionally indiscriminate bombings and killings of innocents or otherwise, by the terrorists -- and I wish the "Euroliberals" as quoted, would also be angry about this aswell.

We have sold said chemical weapons to Saddam, after he killed 5000 of his own people.

Which is'int true, considering those chemicals were bought off the Russian blackmarket -- my sources for the SCUD missles via a previous discussion, which I believe was in the pages or threads past, shows exactly where Iraq got them.

Russian Black Markets; and they were not American Chemicals.

Meh, we need info.... erm.. excuse me.. .isnt that what started the beheadings?

No, Daniel Pearl was beheaded long before the tortures or scandals -- the text for the video was later added to supplement with the original message, that Daniel Pearl was a jew, and in short, needed to die.

(I have the original video, and the edited one on my harddrive).

Long since before Abu Gharib, Palestinian terrorists were known to behead IDF Soldiers and take organs from their bodies in celebration of defeating "evil Zionists".

The whole beheading video idea was started in Chechnya, and now its carried onto Iraq. [However, having different effects].

Many people supported Saddam when he went against the UN sanctions because it was these sanctions that stopped water treatment chemicals coming in that were so badly needed after WE blew their water supplies up; killing half a million.

Oh, so Saddam's some kind of hero then, despite his hands carried those half a million and more's blood? Not that you said he was a hero, but I disagree he could be portrayed as such, or forced into such a quarrel. He was gaven options.

I think if people supported him, they knew they did'nt have much an option to disagree with him either.

Also I believe you're around ten times more likely to die in Iraq now than before the war, but I'd have to double check.

Actually, bombings are on the decrease, and the American casualties are also decreasing. Its actually starting to get calmer -- well, according to CBS.

terrorists are bothered about.

I'm bothered about they're choices -- maybe you should consider I might be the terrorist of the future simply for the basis my country was attacked ...

 

[CptStern]

Oh please, are we really that much more ruthless as compared to those we've fought against? Bombing water treatement plants might be horrible, but so is blowing up 300+ people at an Israeli Bus stop.

300 civilians doesnt compare to 500,000 children.

Something's "got to give" for all of this rampant violence and hate. I dont believe one viewpoint, one religion, one people, or one nation is soley or even mostly responsible for how apprenhensive we've become to one another.

We choose our apprehensions -- I think we all need to chill down, and think logicaly before we tear each other down due to spur of the moment angst.

not sure what you're getting at but it's rather disgusting that most of will shout indignation over 50 people killed by a roadside bomb yet turn a blind eye to 500,000 children purposefully killed by far worse methods: disease and hunger. You caused it, YOU are responsible for it, no amount of scapegoating, no amount of deference of blame will take that away



None here have referenced that the Middle-East are brainless evil doers -- huge misconception on your part.

However, we were calling Osama Bin Ladens little military religion thoughtless and evil -- just like we could call the United States politics thoughtless and evil.

However, those two are both my personal opinions -- but perhaps you caught the just of the point.



No, its the perfect answer. With so many religious beliefs, you can uphold each ones equality by catering respectible laws defending they're moral practises, therefore breaking society in with National tolerance.

Without a Democracy to cater, one religion could be excluded or voiceless in any other situation -- a Democracy, hopefully, should failsafe that.



However, the Country should not be stopped to its last breath due to a minority -- if a majority has ruled, so be it. If a minority disagree's, they have a right to disagree and petition to allow there changes for themselves, and the rest of the changes for other people.

But that would'nt work out, would it? Thats the dream of Neo-America. Everyone for themselves. I'm not Kosher with Anarchism.



No, not historically. Only until recently can you accord from the last 20 years we might have been "a" enemy of Iraq -- but 2,000 years ago, we did'nt have a thing to do with them. 200 years ago, nadda.

If your speaking about the west, just remember that our west, the "American" west, did'nt get involved in this bullcrap until after the middle-quarter of the Cold War.



Understanding your perspectives, I disagree that they should share their opinions in the form of a bomb. I mean, what does that convey besides you were a crazy lunatic?

For all we know, the bomber could've been upset because his girlfriend broke up with him, and so therefore justified killing 60 people on that basis -- are we now to unite the girl with his charred silently screaming ashed body because it was his ideal?

I find that particularly sick, so again, I think there are other ways.



Well, count me as one of the conservatives who doubts that.



If this indeed true, which I'm sure the source will be flung up soon after this post, then we should remember our discussion nearly three months back.

I recall we discussed, that since the US was the conquering army, it should be able to plunder out Iraq's resources simply because it won ... however, I remember during the discussion, that the US simply was'nt doing that as much as everyone should like to think.

I disagree its resources should be plundered -- ...

I dont know where your getting those figures, but I do know that Saddam's choices were rigid and foreshadowed such losses, with or without our alleged involvement.

I've proved the US deliberately caused those conditions in an attempt to cause a civilian revolt against saddam ...the 500,000 children were the pawns that paid the price for the failed coup. Oh and before you regurgitate your stock response that saddam could have surrendered, I'd like to remind you that saddam was a narrcissistic murderous bastard who cared little for the people of iraq ...but the same could be said about the US

Out of 15 alleged deaths recorded by courts involving US prisons, most of the deaths came out of starving or severe beatings. None of these were recorded beheadings, with our soldiers chanting in the background; "God is good". None of these were recorded executions, where our soldiers rolled dead bodies off of hills, and then shot them up as they rolled down.

why does that matter? these are lawless individuals carrying out their own brand of justice ..the torures and murders in the prisons and in the fields were SANCTIONED by the US, a country by it's own volition is bound by international law ..they crossed the line when the sanctioned torture and bombed civilian targets

Some have died, hundreds have been allegedly tortured (I cant find whats a distinguishing trait for torture, the littlest prisoner, or having sheet bamboo shoved under your nails), however none of those compare to the intentionally indiscriminate bombings and killings of innocents or otherwise, by the terrorists -- and I wish the "Euroliberals" as quoted, would also be angry about this aswell.

nothing compared to the malaria, typhoid, diphtheria, pertussis, Meningitis, Cholera and other diseases that killed 500,000 children ..at one point 6000 children a week ...6000 a week from lack of simple clean drinking water ...that's far more evil far more insidious than a dozen planes slamming into the sides of building, far more insidious and horrible than any torture, beheading, murder

Actually, bombings are on the decrease, and the American casualties are also decreasing. Its actually starting to get calmer -- well, according to CBS.

no

"With U.S. casualties mounting and ..."

source

no

"Civilian casualties mounting in Iraq"

source

 

[Calanen]

The bulk of the 'insurgents' are not suicide bombers btw..... they are people firing mortars from afar, doing ambushes, snipers, Improvised Explosive Devices.... There are suicide bombers - but they are a small fraction of what is going on there day to day. And included in that statistic, are people like the mongoloid boy who was used to blow people up......

And its not a 'tenner't that people are being offered, but a lot, lot more money. If I lived in Iraq I would join the Iraqi national guard and kill these terrorist assholes who are killing innocent people, civilians. But I can understand, how, in an area that is moderarely occupied by them - if u had no job, and big suitcase full of money was presented to you if u just fired some RPGs at US forces....it would be tempting. Id like to say I would not do it, but I cannot know for sure.

When America saved Europe in WW2 - did American create a an American dictatorship? Steal all of Europes resources? er no.... have they any other time? No. Russia sure did though when it put the iron curtain down.

The oil equipment is in Iraq, because the oil infrastructure is falling apart. Its Iraqs best resource, and a guaranteed way for Iraq to get on its feet. Not because the USA is going to steal oil. It might buy some...but it wont steal it.

And lets get this straight, it was saddam who killed people through sanctions - he still lived the high life - he could have given his people food instead of palaces. He chose not to - and they died. But to blame the USA for this or its allies is nonsense. He had billions in cash, billions. That buys a lot of food.

Did the USA deliberately bomb water treatment plants? I doubt it. We certainly have helped repair them.

America has billions in aid it wants to spend in Iraq fixing the place up. But it cant, because people are killing engineers and workmen.

America and its allies, are the best chance that the ordinary Iraqis have for a good life and a good government, chosen by them. We cannot back down to this intimidation, and must be strong.

And before any1 says, well i don't see you joining up. I actually have twice now. Once with the US Army (but the INS got me first) and now with the Australian army. They may not send me, but I'd go if they did. I don't want to see any1 have to live in the shadow of such tyranny. If these guys will blow up their own countrymen to get into power, can u imagine what they will do, if they are in power?

I think democracy is the best solution - because you are saying, you choose who u want. Whats fairer than that?

The Kurds in the north are causing no trouble. Neither are most of the shia. Even most of the Sunnis dont want any problems. Its just hardliners ex-Saddam remnants, Al-Quada, and whoever Syrian and Iranian intelligence can round up.....and with a suitcase full of money in a poor country, that can be quite a few people.

 

[kmack]

It should be noted that suicide bombers are often give a great deal of money (well their family is given the money :| ) to kill blow themselves, and their enemies (whether religious or political) to pieces. They cannot be thinking about anyone but their families (since they can't really be around to spend it), so they must believe in something, or NEED the money so badly as to resort to that.

I think that this is the problem we face in Iraq, that these people hold their beliefs so strongly that they will NEVER surrender, much like the Japanese in WWII (and much of history, think Sepuku).

Now to delicately divert the direction of this thread:

Do you think that we will see suicide bombers in America? These people have bombs, when is it we see them strap one to their chests, casually walk into a McDonald's in NYC (or Boston, or St. Louis etc) and kill innocent Americans (again ). It seems that with this so commonplace in other countries that it is a valid threat. What can the government do about it?

 

[CptStern]

And lets get this straight, it was saddam who killed people through sanctions - he still lived the high life - he could have given his people food instead of palaces. He chose not to - and they died. But to blame the USA for this or its allies is nonsense. He had billions in cash, billions. That buys a lot of food.

deferring blame? saddam was a murderous tyrant ..you knew that ...you also thought it was worth the deaths of 500,000 children to remove saddam

- "We Think the Price Is Worth It" - Madeline Albright

Did the USA deliberately bomb water treatment plants? I doubt it. We certainly have helped repair them.

yes the US DELIBERATELY bombed the water treatment plants ..this document proves it



this document proves they knew what the outcome of bombing of water treatment plants were going to be

Effects of Bombing on Disease Occurrence in Baghdad



this document details how disease will affect the population:
source

MOST LIKELY DISEASES DURING THE NEXT 60-90 DAYS (DESCENDING
ORDER)

- Diarrheal diseases (particularly children)
- Acute respiratory illnesses (colds and influenza)
- Typhoid
- Hepatitis A (particularly children)
- Measles, diphtheria, and pertussis (particularly children)
- Meningitis, including meningococcal (particularly children)
- Cholera (possible, but less likely)



MOST LIKELY DISEASES DURING THE FOLLOWING 90-180 DAYS

- Diarrheal diseases (particularly children)
- Acute respiratory illnesses (colds)
- Typhoid
- Hepatitis A (particularly children)
- Conjunctivitis (Eye infections)
- Measles, diphtheria, and pertussis (particularly children)
- Cutaneous leishmaniasis
- Meningococcal meningitis (particularly children)
- Malaria
- Cholera (possible, but less likely)



most damning:

"assessment is that major disease outbreaks currently have not occurred in Baghdad or Basrah. For severe outbreaks to develop, a protracted war or more extensive collateral damage would have to occur."



maybe it's because I'm part of the "loony-left" but I can see the truth for what it is ...to this day no "righty" has acknowlegded their government is guilty of crimes against humanity even though the proof is staring them in the face, they just ignore or defer blame ...and I have a sneaking suspicion you'll follow suit

 

[Calanen]

Yes the US DELIBERATELY bombed the water treatment plants ..this document proves it

Hang on this is talking about Gulf War I - when I said I doubt it, I was referring to the most recent conflict.....

You keep saying that the USA killed 500,000 children? I am assuming this is through the sanctions that have been applied to Iraq? Or not - I don't know. Tell me where the 500k figure comes from?

 

[Calanen]

Ok - ive seen what you are saying. You are saying that as a result of water treatment facilities being destroyed in 1991 by the USA and allies (hmm French are included in that one....) that 500,000 Iraqi children died as a result of the following diseases caused by those water treatment plants being blown up.

I dont know whether this is a fact or not - so I will look into it further.

 

[CptStern]

Hang on this is talking about Gulf War I - when I said I doubt it, I was referring to the most recent conflict.....

no, it wouldnt have flown this time as many peace organizations were watching ...not too mention that the Human shield organization was there to protect them from bombing the water treatment plants

You keep saying that the USA killed 500,000 children? I am assuming this is through the sanctions that have been applied to Iraq? Or not - I don't know. Tell me where the 500k figure comes from?

"Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it."

--60 Minutes (5/12/96)

oh and dont try to defer blame on the UN or saddam ..every last one of them died as a result of unsanitary drinking water ...the treatment plants the US destroyed ...and dont bother to defer blame and say it was saddam's fault because of the oil-for-food program because if you look at the dates those 500,000 children died before it was put into place ...in fact that number is WHY it was set up in the first place

 

[CptStern]

Ok - ive seen what you are saying. You are saying that as a result of water treatment facilities being destroyed in 1991 by the USA and allies (hmm French are included in that one....) that 500,000 Iraqi children died as a result of the following diseases caused by those water treatment plants being blown up.

I dont know whether this is a fact or not - so I will look into it further.

it's fact and NO it wasnt the US and it's allies ..the US did the actual bombing

oh and it's fact ...those documents are the real thing, they were released because of the freedom of information act

this document sums up all the evidence presented ...it is indisputable

 

[Calanen]

Indisputable? Perhaps - ill need to check it out. But, every day i see thousands of documents produced by both sides in a case. And not much that is indisputable.

But taking what you say at its highest, I will look into it further and let you know what I think.

 

[CptStern]

well considering the documents are from Defense Intelligence Agency that in itself pretty much proves it


IRAQ WATER TREATMMENT VULNERABILITIES


from: DIA washington dc

DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency):

responsiblities:

"Provide peacetime, crisis, contingency, and combat intelligence support
to the operational military forces."



to: CENTCOM

responsibilities:

"Provides the warfighters in theater with seamless, end-to-end, integrated information services that are flexible, interoperable, reliable, affordable and sustainable. "

 

[kmack]

this thread is still in existance? i apologize again for starting it.

 

[GhostFox]

it's fact and NO it wasnt the US and it's allies ..the US did the actual bombing

The UN did the bombing. Your own source proved this before. They simply utilized US millitary equipment and personel.

I'm getting dizzy Stern

 

[burner69]

The UN did the bombing. Your own source proved this before. They simply utilized US millitary equipment and personel.

I'm getting dizzy Stern

I have to admit I agree with GhostFox here. While US bombs were used, it was all organised and run by the UN.

I think that's the first time I've ever disagreed with Stern

 

[GhostFox]

While US bombs were used, it was all organised and run by the UN.

Beyond that, just to be clear, it was sanctioned by the UN, not just orginized. Which makes it an undeniably UN action.

Coming to the dark side, eh Burner?

 

[CptStern]

The UN did the bombing. Your own source proved this before. They simply utilized US millitary equipment and personel.

I'm getting dizzy Stern

:upstare: no, the US not the UN ..CENTCOM is american not UN ..DIA is american not UN

provide the source, show me where it says the UN wrote those documents, show me where it says the UN provided those military target assessments

 

[GhostFox]

Your source says it was sanctioned by the UN. That makes it a UN action. Case closed.

 

[burner69]

Beyond that, just to be clear, it was sanctioned by the UN, not just orginized. Which makes it an undeniably UN action.

Coming to the dark side, eh Burner?

Sorry mate, firmly rooted right here
Just on this occasion the blame dosen't fall on the US, it falls on all countries involved with the UN. Thoug admittedly some more than others.

Maybe sum uzzer time ve cud have been... friends...

 

[CptStern]

:upstare:


direct proof:

"The electrical attacks proved extremely effective ... The loss of electricity shut down the capital's water treatment plants and led to a public health crisis from raw sewage dumped in the Tigris River."


source


"A key example of such dual-use targeting was the destruction of Iraqi electrical power facilities in Desert Storm. While crippling Iraq's military command and control capability, destruction of these facilities shut down water purification and sewage treatment plants. As a result, epidemics of gastroenteritis, cholera, and typhoid broke out, leading to perhaps as many as 100,000 civilian deaths and a doubling of the infant mortality rate. Given such effects on non-combatants, are electrical power facilities legitimate military targets? Does airpower doctrine acknowledge, support, or condemn such indirect effects? Must air campaign planners weigh these indirect effects in their target selection process? ...

"Finally, the US Air Force has a vested interest in attacking dual-use targets so long as dual-use target destruction serves the double role of destroying legitimate military capabilities and indirectly targeting civilian morale. So long as this remains within the letter if not the spirit of the law and the JWE [Christian Just-War Ethic], the Air Force will cling to the status quo."

USAF Colonel John A Warden



even after the bombings they deliberately withheld items deemed necessary to sustain life:

Press release from U.S. Congressional Representative Tony Hall's office, June 28, 2000, on Rep. Hall's return from Iraq. press release excerpt :

In a letter to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Hall said, "I share UNICEF's concerns about the profound effects of increasing deterioration of Iraq's water supply and sanitation systems on its children's health. The prime killer of children under five years of age - diarrhoeal diseases - has reached epidemic proportions and they now strike four times more often than they did in 1990."

"Holds on contracts for the water and sanitation sector are a prime reason for the increases in sickness and death," Hall wrote. Of the 18 contracts, all but one hold was placed by the U.S. Government. The contracts are for purification chemicals, chlorinators, chemical dosing pumps, water tankers, and other equipment."

 

[GhostFox]

What is your point Stern? All actions were sanctioned by the UN. If you want to blame the UN, I'd be happy to join you. I think they were wrong in their decisions. If you want to blame the US, people will just ignore you. Your agenda is interferring with your good intentions. Ask Michael Moore about that.

 

[CptStern]

my point was pretty obvious

 

[GhostFox]

my point was pretty obvious

Please explain your point to me. The only thing I got out of your post is that you are choosing to ignore the fact that the UN sanctioned all actions, thus making them UN actions.

 

[CptStern]

Please explain your point to me. The only thing I got out of your post is that you are choosing to ignore the fact that the UN sanctioned all actions, thus making them UN actions.

it's all there in black and grey